standardization of D

[janderson]

Ameer Armaly wrote:
> "janderson" <askme at me.com> wrote in message 
> news:ev1u1d$1q81$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> Although you raise some good points I can't agree here.  I think D still 
>> has a few more years development until we get to that stage.  People are 
>> only just starting to use it for real.  We should have the flexibility to 
>> fix their issues as they arise rather then setting it in stone at the 
>> moment.  I see 1.0 as kinda like a speedbump to stability.  The more we go 
>> over the more set in stone it'll get.  I think this will be a much more 
>> valid argument at 2.0 and even more so at 3.0.
>>
> It seems then that we interpret 1.0 in different ways; my first thought was 
> that it was going to be a setup (language, compiler, libs) that people could 
> just pick up and run with. But apparently not...
>> -Joel

My view is that this is our first trial at having a stabilized version. 
  Kinda like a trial run.  1.0 spec is set in stone, bugs are being 
fixed.    2.0 will be more rigid and so on.

-Joel